Homeopathy (2011) 100, 183e186

Ó 2011 The Faculty of Homeopathy

doi:10.1016/j.homp.2011.03.001, available online at http://www.sciencedirect.com

CLINICAL

A discussion: the future role of homeopathy

in the National Health Service (NHS)
Daniel Yu-Hin Ng*
College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

Homeopathy has been provided by the National Health Service in the UK for over 60 years,
funded largely by taxpayer’s money. However, in recent years, its provision has come un-
der much criticism questioning its true value. Taking a neutral stance, arguments both for
and against the provision of homeopathy on the NHS is presented. It includes issues such
as the evidence and safety profile of homeopathy, but also takes into account costs and
benefits of homeopathy in a wider perspective. Overall, the provision of homeopathy is jus-
tified as long as there is a need within the population, occupying a complementary role
alongside conventional medicine. Homeopathy (2011) 100, 183e186.

Keywords: Homeopathy; National Health Service; Evidence-base; Safety; Cost;

Patient reported benefit

Introduction money. However, it is not clear whether its provision on

Historically homeopathy has been provided through the
British National Health Service (NHS), both through ded-
icated secondary care units and General Practitioners
(GPs). In recent years there have been several calls for
the NHS to cease providing homeopathy and these have re-
sulted in reduced commissioning. These calls have been
based on a claimed lack of evidence and the implausibility
of the actions of very high dilutions.
The author argues that other factors including safety,
cost/cost-effectiveness and patient reported benefit should
also be considered when making commissioning decisions
on homeopathy. Homeopathy should be integrated and
a credible system of regulation established for homeopaths
who are not members of health professions.
Since Hahnemann founded homeopathy over 200 years
ago, it has become increasingly popular and is now a major
complementary and alternative therapy in the UK.1 Home-
opathy has been part of the National Health Service (NHS)
for over 60 years. Hundreds of general practitioners use
homeopathy in primary care and every year thousands of pa-
tients are referred to homeopathic hospitals.2 As part of the
NHS, homeopathic hospitals are funded by taxpayer’s
*Correspondence: Daniel Yu-Hin Ng, College of Medical and Den-
tal Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
E-mail: dyn605@bham.ac.uk
Received 6 December 2009; revised 29 November 2010; accepted
11 March 2011
the NHS is justified.
In March 2009 one of only five homeopathic hospitals in
the UK e the Tunbridge Wells Homeopathic Hospital e
was closed as West Kent NHS Primary Care Trust decided
to terminate commissioning for homeopathy.3 Meanwhile
many more primary care trusts have cut contracts in
homeopathic services.4 The NHS has finite resources and can-
not provide everything patients want. Ending to homeopathy
on the NHS can potentially divert money from homeopathy to
other therapies. Is the loss of homeopathy in the NHS truly
justified? This short discussion paper overviews the issues.
Evidence
Evidence-based medicine has set a platform for critics of
homeopathy. Ernst has pointed out that the main criterion
for a therapy to be incorporated in the NHS is demonstra-
tion of clinical effectiveness.5 But research in homeopathy
has provided contradictory evidence on its therapeutic
values. Take the examples of two large studies published
in the Lancet. Firstly, in a meta-analysis of placebo-
controlled trials, Linde and his co-authors conclude the
positive effects by homeopathy cannot be explained by pla-
cebo.6 On the contrary, in a comparative study of homeop-
athy and allopathy using much the same raw data, Shang
and his colleagues conclude the effect of homeopathy is
similar to placebo.7
There have been 138 published randomized controlled
trials on homeopathy, 44% of which show positive effects.2
 The future role of homeopathy in the NHS
DYH Ng
184
There may be some degree of publication bias that is diffi-
cult to estimate. Studies showing negative or no-difference
results may not be published, leading to an overestimate of
positive results. In addition, most studies (55%) gave either
inconclusive or negative data, so the seemingly large num-
ber of positive trials should therefore be interpreted with
care. To date, there is no definitive evidence on the clinical
effects of homeopathy which is universally accepted. Years
of research in homeopathy seem to be leading nowhere.
In the past few years, a group of doctors and scientists led
by Professor Baum have repeatedly written to every primary
care trust (PCT) calling on them to stop funding homeopathy
services.8,9 They argue that homeopathy is implausible and
lacks evidence, urging PCTs to review their practice
accordingly. As a result, more than a quarter of primary
care trusts have reduced commissioning for homeopathy
and the number of homeopathic prescriptions has fallen by
40% in the two years to 2007.10 Referrals to homeopathic
hospitals have reduced by a fifth and some patients have
been refused homeopathic treatment.11
This attempt to terminate homeopathy on the NHS has
stunned many in the homeopathy profession. However, it
is supported by reviews from the NHS. In 2002, the NHS
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination conducted a review
of available data from trials in homeopathy. It concludes
there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of ho-
meopathy as a treatment.12 The media has also played its
part. Speaking on BBC Radio 4, for instance, Professor
Raymond Tallis criticized the integration of homeopathy
in NHS.13 The Daily Mail published an article written by
Professor Baum who claims that NHS is essentially provid-
ing placebos to patients e an unjustified action that needs
to change immediately.14 Furthermore the only professor in
complementary medicine in the UK, Professor Ernst, has
written extensively attacking homeopathy and supporting
the termination of homeopathy services in the NHS.15
Despite the lack of definitive positive evidence in clini-
cal trials, there are many case reports describing the bene-
fits of homeopathic treatment in patients.2 Homeopathy is
a holistic therapy that is strongly patient-focused and em-
phasizes the doctorepatient relationship. Many random-
ized placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy are carried
out using one remedy for all subjects in the treatment
arm. This does not reflect real homeopathic practice where
different factors such as personality are taken into account
in deciding the most appropriate remedy. A more realistic
approach for homeopathic research is to measure non-
specific effects and patient-perceived benefits. The Bristol
Patient Outcome Study in 2005 shows that more than 70%
of patients receiving homeopathy treatments report bene-
fits.16 This is an excellent outcome considering many of
these patients failed to improve with conventional treat-
ment before seeking homeopathic service. Arguably, a pos-
itive patient experience is what matters most, and is also
what the NHS strives for. Is it enough to secure homeopa-
thy a place in the NHS?
The House of Lords report in 2000 argued that the
government should support research in complementary
and alternative medicine (CAM) with promising but
Homeopathy
not sufficient data of effectiveness.17 In 2008, an evalu-
ation of CAM carried out in Northern Ireland shows
that patients experience significant health gains after ho-
meopathic treatment. It recommended the provision of
homeopathic services in primary care context.18 How-
ever, the House of Commons Science and Technology
Committee’s ‘Evidence Check’ on Homeopathy, pub-
lished in February 2010, said that homeopathy should
not be provided on the NHS and that no further research
should be done; it also criticized the licensing of prod-
ucts by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regula-
tory Agency.19
Plausibility
Some critics move the argument away from evidence and
take a different approach based on the biologically implau-
sibility of the actions of ‘ultramolecular’ dilutions accord-
ing to current scientific knowledge. For instance, Professor
Blakemore, former Chief Executive of the Medical
Research Council states “If we were to accept the principles
of homeopathy we would have to overturn the whole of
physics and chemistry”.20
How do those who favour homeopathy reply to these
critics? One element is the emerging concept of ‘water
memory’. Water memory is yet to establish itself as
a proven mechanism responsible for the clinical effects
in patients taking homeopathic remedies, but if proven
would be a plausible mechanism. The Japanese scientist
Emoto has presented photographs of frozen water showing
that they change conformation at a molecular level when
exposed to different environments.21 Other studies using
physico-chemical techniques, thermoluminescence,
Raman and Ultraviolet Visible Spectroscopy have also
shown that water has the ability to hold memory.22 These
developments have the potential to answer critics who ar-
gue that homeopathy should not be provided in the NHS
due to its implausibility.
Campaign
The British Homeopathic Association (BHA) has
launched a campaign that gathers voices of those in support
of homeopathy. It hopes to restore and reaffirm support the
use of homeopathy in NHS. The campaign emphasizes the
positive evidence of homeopathy and the tiny cost of its ser-
vices in relation to other NHS expense. Homeopathy service
in Tunbridge Wells Hospital costs only £196,000 per year,23
in massive contrast against the £350 million that was spent by
the NHS on management consultants in 2008.24
Benefits of homeopathy
Judging whether homeopathy has a place in the NHS
should not only be based on its effectiveness and plausibil-
ity, but should also take into account other aspects. Many
patients suffer from illnesses that are difficult to treat or un-
treatable with conventional medicine, for example eczema
and side effects from cancer treatment. Homeopathy gives

hopes to these individuals and acts as a welcome psycho-
logical boost. Many homeopathic remedies are made
from natural ingredients available in a variety of forms
that are easy to use, hence are likely to achieve better com-
pliance than conventional treatments. Is it then ethical to
withdraw homeopathy when patients currently choose to
use it and report benefit from it?
Safety
Any therapy must include an acceptable safety profile
if it is to be accepted in the NHS. A systematic review
by Dantas et al. shows that homeopathy has a good safety
profile with limited adverse effects.25 However, Professor
Ernst argues that homeopathy is unsafe as it contributes
to poor medical practice. He points out in his blog that
some homeopaths dissuade people from immunizing their
children.26 He also criticises advice given by some non-
medical homeopaths to avoid antiviral drugs in the recent
swine flu epidemic.27 To what extent homeopathy con-
tributes to unsafe medical practice remains unclear, but
if homeopaths solely concentrate on homeopathy and ig-
nore conventional medicine, this would clearly pose
a risk to patient.
In contrast to Ernst’s arguments, a reduction of homeo-
pathic services in the NHS may on the other hand raise its
own safety problem. As many PCTs reduce commissioning
for homeopathy, patients have lost access to services previ-
ously accessible on the NHS and subject to NHS clinical
governance. As there is no regulation of homeopaths who
are not members of statutorily-regulated health professions
in the UK, there are concerns with respect to the expansion
of private homeopathy and potential risk to patients.9 A reg-
ulatory body to govern such practitioners would guarantee
safety to patients.
Cost
Beside a satisfactory safety profile, a cost profile also
needs to be considered when analysing the provision of ho-
meopathy in the NHS. More than a quarter of primary care
trusts have stopped or reduced funding for homeopathy ser-
vices over the past two years in an attempt to cut expenses.11
Despite these measures, studies have suggested a favourable
cost-effectiveness profile for homeopathy services when
comparing with conventional medicine. Homeopathy costs
the NHS about £4 million in 2008.28 An independent report
by the economist Christopher Smallwood estimates the pro-
vision of homeopathy in primary care can make a substantial
saving of £119 million on what would otherwise need to be
spent on relatively expensive conventional medicine.29 The
Lords Science and Technology Committee Report of 2000
also concluded that some cost-effectiveness studies on ho-
meopathy show savings for the NHS.17 More study is still
needed to decide if homeopathy genuinely contributes to
savings in the NHS. If true, it would not be justified to sac-
rifice homeopathic service in the NHS as an attempt to
reduce expenses.
The future role of homeopathy in the NHS
DY-H Ng
185
Conclusion
Homeopathic services in the NHS have declined in
recent years. Despite publications showing positive
effects in homeopathy,30 for many years research in
homeopathy has reached no definite conclusion. Medi-
cine now places more importance in evidence-based
practice than ever before, pushing for a cut in NHS ho-
meopathy. What lies ahead for homeopathy on the
NHS remains uncertain.
In my opinion homeopathy in the NHS should not be
stopped solely on the lack of clear positive evidence
from trials. Data on patient popularity and patient-
reported benefits have been promising and support the
provision of homeopathy in the NHS. Should patient
demand and patient-reported benefits come before or after
evidence-based medicine? This is something beyond the
scope of this article.
Cost-effectiveness studies show that homeopathy
offers savings compare with conventional medicine. For
this reason the provision of homeopathy on the NHS is
justified as long as patient demand remains and the
majority of patients experience benefits. In the near
future, the best approach is to continue the integration
of homeopathy in the NHS with a complementary role
supporting conventional medicine. Regular reviews and
audits are vital to ensure a high standard of homeopathy
service. A body regulating homeopaths who are not al-
ready members of health professions is also important
to provide the best healthcare for patients.
References
1 Ernst E, White A. BBC survey of complementary medicine use in
the UK. Complement Ther Med 2000; 8(1): 32e36.
2 British Homeopathic Association website http://www.
britishhomeopathic.org/getting_treatment/homeopathy_in_the_nhs/
index.html [accessed 28.11.10].
3 Sinead H. Lack of evidence’ blamed as homeopathy funding is
withdrawn. KentOnline, http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kentonline/
newsarchive.aspx?articleid=45494; 29 July 2009 [accessed
28.11.10].
4 Henderson M. Hard-up NHS trusts cut back on unproven homeop-
athy treatment. The Times, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_
and_style/health/article1826561.ece; 23 May 2007 [accessed
28.11.10].
5 Edzard E. Complementary and alternative medicine: what the NHS
should be funding? Br J Gen Pract 2008; 58: 208e209.
6 Linde K, Clausius N, Ramirez G, et al. Are the clinical effects of
homeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo controlled
trails. Lancet 1997; 350(9081): 834e843.
7 Shang A, Huwiler-M€ untener K, Nartey L, et al. Are the clinical ef-
fects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of
placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet
2005; 366(9487): 726e732.
8 Randerson J. Doctors renew drive to ban NHS homeopathy. The
Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/may/23/
health.medicineandhealth; 23 May 2007 [accessed 28.11.10].
9 Baum M. Doctors’ campaign against alternative therapies.
Times Online, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/
article723787.ece; May 2006 [accessed 28.11.10].
Homeopathy
 The future role of homeopathy in the NHS
DYH Ng
186
10 Macrae F. 40 per cent fall in homeopathic prescriptions as GP shuns the
alternative medicine. Daily Mail, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/
article-1038422/40-cent-fall-homeopathic-prescriptions-GP-shuns-
alternative-medicine.html; 25 July 2008 [accessed 28.11.10].
11 Praities N. Homeopathy victim of PCT funding cuts. Pulse, http://
www.pulsetoday.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=4116950; 30 Jan 2008
[accessed 28.11.10].
12 O’Meara S, Wilson P, Bridle C, Kleijnen J, Wright K. Homeopathy.
Effective Health Care, NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination,
University of York 2002; 7(3).
13 BBC radio 4 23rd May 2007 07:45e07:50 http://www.bbc.co.uk/
radio4/today/listenagain/listenagain_20070523.shtml [accessed
28.11.10]
14 Maxwell K. Homeopathy is worse than witchcraft e and the NHS
must stop paying for it. Daily Mail, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
health/article-451908/Homeopathy-worse-witchcraft-NHS-stop-
paying-it.html; 1 May 2007 [accessed 28.11.10].
15 Ernst E. Ernst’s CAM blog. Pulse. http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/
section.asp?navcode=743 [accessed 28.11.10]
16 Spence DS, Thompson EA, Barron SJ. Homeopathic treatment for
chronic disease: a 6-year university-hospital outpatient observa-
tional study. J Altern Complement Med 2005; 5: 793e798.
17 Criteria for NHS Provision, Chapter 9, House of Lords, Science and
Technology Committee Sixth Report: London, http://www.
publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldselect/ldsctech/123/
12301.htm; 2000.
18 McDade D. Evaluation of complementary and alternative medicines
by social & market research. Department of Health, Social Services
and Public Safety, May 2008.
19 Evidence check 2-Homeopathy, Science and Technology Commit-
tee e Fourth Report, House of Commons, UK Parliament; 2010.
Homeopathy
20 http://www.taxtyranny.ca/images/HTML/Medical-Doctors-and-
Natural-Health/Articles/ShockingTruth.pdf [accessed 28.11.10]
21 Emoto M. The hidden messages in water. Translated by DAThayne.
1st edn. Oregon: Beyond Words Publishing, 2004.
22 Basic science research in homeopathy http://www.
facultyofhomeopathy.org/research/basic_science_research.html
[accessed 28.11.10]
23 Homeopathy in the NHS. Campaign pack. British Homeopathic
Association, 2008.
24 NHS spent £350 million on management consultants in a year. In:
Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/
5303324/NHS-spent-350million-on-management-consultants-
in-a-year.html; 10 May 2009 [accessed 28.11.10].
25 Dantas F, Rampes H. Do homeopathic remedies provoke adverse ef-
fects? A systematic review. Br Homeopath J 2000; 89(Suppl. 1):
S35eS38.
26 Ernst E. CAM practitioners share some of the blame for measles
epidemic. Pulse, http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/story.asp?
storycode=4122637; 7 May 2009 [accessed 28.11.10].
27 Edzard E. Homeopaths ride to swine flu. Pulse, http://www.pulsetoday.
co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=20&storycode=4122632&c=1; 6 May
2009 [accessed 28.11.10].
28 Boseley S. Critics find NHS’s £12m spend on homeopathy hard to
swallow. The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/
jun/10/complementary-medicine-nhs-more4; 10 June 2009.
[accessed 28.11.10].
29 Smallwood C. The role of complementary and alternative medicine
in the NHS. Freshminds 2005.
30 Randomised controlled trials in homeopathy. Faculty of Homeopathy
http://www.facultyofhomeopathy.org/research/rcts_in_homeopathy/
[accessed 28.11.10]